The Minutes of the Meetings of November 18, 1998 and December 9, 1998 were
approved.

4. Report from the Chair.

1. Reply from the Chairman of the Board.

Dr. Jones reported that on December 14, 1998 he sent the Senate’s
Resolution to the Chairman of the Board of Trustees with a cover letter in which
the reasons for holding searches was repeated. Jones stressed that the
Resolution was aimed at the process, rather than at any individuals. Mr. Brunson’s
reply, which was distributed to the faculty, refers to certain portions of Jones’
letter and makes the following points:

Future Presidential Searches - Mr. Brunson’s letter stated that in the
future, under probably different circumstances, the search for the president
would incorporate the process and practices advocated by the Senate. Based on
this response, the Senate Executive Committee recommended that President Moulton
requested that the Trustees appoint a small committee with representatives from
the Trustees and the Faculty Senate to draft a policy for future searches. Mr.
Moulton said he would make this recommendation to the Trustees.

Planning Process - In accordance with Mr. Brunson’s statement that we
should institute a planning process to develop a collective long-term vision for
the university community, Dr. Jones itemized various very important issues that
emerge repeatedly, such as teaching loads, support for research, etc. and that
have an implication on the type of university we are and where we are headed.
The Executive Committee recommended to Mr. Moulton that he request that the
Trustees indicate a commitment to get such a process started, a commitment that
would: (a) include adequate funding, (b) allow sufficient time to obtain
meaningful results, (c) involve a professional outside consultant and (d)
establish university committees.

2. Resolution and the Process of Voting.

Dr. Jones stated that he believed that the issues involved in the vote of no
confidence make the Senate’s position on the search process a valid one. The
size of the margin was decisive. The Senate is the duly constituted
representative voice of the faculty - even so, some faculty feel that the Senate
should not take actions without consulting faculty. Jones has always attempted
to seek input from all faculty members and encourages caucus and college
meetings; however, to his regret, the manner in which the Trustee’s acted (a
major decision which had not even been placed on the agenda) did not allow any
more time for input from the individual faculty. Jones felt that this momentous
issue had surely been a topic of conversation among faculty after the Trustees’
meeting so that the Senators surely knew how the faculty felt at the time of the
vote.

Several faculty members have expressed concern about meetings in which there
is administrative involvement in invoking faculty opinion.

Jones felt that it was the Trustees' unfortunate action, not the Senate, that
sparked this round of conflict. (See Stan Tiner’s editorial of 4 December,
1998). The Senate Executive Committee has been working cooperatively since the
resolution with the administration, as they had done before, and have had two
productive meetings with the President and the Senior VPAA, as well as appearing
with other University representatives at official functions in the community.
The University has never confronted the situation of transition in its 34 years.
The Senate needs to work cooperatively to help the university proceed but we
need to stick by our principles to make sure that the university grows in the
right direction.

3. Letter to Governor-Elect.

Acting on recommendations during the December meeting, Jones wrote to
Governor-Elect Siegelman condemning the Trustee’s action disbanding the Search
Committee and requesting that Mr. Siegelman “insure that proper procedure is
followed in the functioning of the state’s institutions of higher education,
including ours.” Jones also said that lack of familiarity with established
university procedures may have contributed to the breakdown and recommended that
people with experience in institutions of higher learning, such as retired
professors, be nominated to the Board when vacancies occur. Mr. Siegelman
responded with appreciation to Jones for expressing his opinion and stated that
“all issues involving higher education will be made with careful forethought
and consideration.”

4. Work loads, Teaching loads, etc.

In the Senate Executive Committee meeting with President Moulton Jones
reported that many Faculty feel that changes are being instituted which would
have an impact not only on our activities, but also on the overall nature of the
institution. In response to the question of whether there had been changes in
teaching loads, Interim VP Covey replied that neither the policy concerning
teaching loads nor the loads themselves have changed in the current academic
year, nor is there a plan to start issuing different types of contracts for new
tenure-track professors.

5. Salary Issues.

a. Vacation and Sick-leave Resolutions: Mr. Moulton expressed an
understanding that Faculty wish to incorporate the retirement benefits such
policies would have, especially if faculty at other institutions receive this
benefit. However, he had questions concerning the precise manner of
implementation, whether or not it could be consistently applied, and exactly
what is being done at other institutions. We look forward to clarification from
the administration regarding Mr. Moulton’s concerns.

b. Compensation Committee: Jones stressed to Mr. Moulton the need to insure
that salary equity be addressed across the institution, for faculty and staff as
well as for the administration. Moulton proposed the make-up of such a
committee, which would address not only amounts of compensation and the proper
groups to be used in comparison, but also would insure that all groups on this
campus are being treated fairly. The Executive Committee did not think that the
ratio of faculty and staff to administration on the proposed committee was
fairly balanced, so this proposal is currently being studied by the Senate
Salary and Benefits Committee.

6. Vice President for Academic Affairs.

Because of the importance of this office and Dr. Covey’s statement that she
does not want to remain in the position permanently, the Executive Committee
requested that a search for a full-time Vice President be held. The Senators
suggested and Mr. Moulton concurred that a national search should be started by
Fall 1999 with the selected candidate to take office by the Fall of 2000 by the
latest.

7. Presidential Forum with the Faculty

At the December meeting with Mr. Moulton the Executive Committee suggested
that he hold a forum to talk about his views and plans, and he repeated at this
meeting that he would be willing to hold a forum this semester, either with the
Faculty Senate or with a group chosen from the Senate and other Faculty.

8. Foundation.

The Senate has long been frustrated with the lack of communication between
the Foundation and the University and the difficulty in solving basic funding
questions. The Executive Committee discussed the possibility of acting as a
mediator by inviting small groups or representatives from the University
administration and the Foundation to begin informal discussions. Before
receiving our invitation to meet, the Foundation invited the Executive Committee
to meet with some of their representatives to answer any questions that the
Faculty might have. The Committee feels that neither the Committee nor the
Faculty should take sides in this conflict , but should work to achieve an end
to what is a senseless conflict among people who should be working toward the
same end. In that context, and with the hope that the Foundation and the
Administration will respond favorably to our suggestions, we accepted the
Foundation invitation and met with them on 13 January. The meeting was cordial,
and we heard their presentation of the Foundation’s purpose and general
financial situation, and we also had the opportunity to ask questions and make
suggestions. The Committee stressed the importance of achieving better
communication and agreement on basic issues. It is important that all parties
involved be included and know which portions of the assets are restricted or
unrestricted so that everyone can be talking about the same things. Some of the
items that we originally considered putting in a resolution are included in the
November minutes. Please review these and give your opinions and suggestions to
your caucus leaders or members of the Executive Committee. This is a crucial
issue that has attracted the attention of the Chronicle of Higher Education.

7. Legislature.

It is important to remain informed about issues affecting us, especially the
proposed $1 million equity allocation (USA is funded at only 50% of the Regional
Standard, as opposed 60% for the average Alabama institution) and the expected
$3.7 million needed to fund the increase in retirement system costs.

8. Other On-going Issues.

a. Library search: A committee has been formed and an advertisement has
been placed.

b. Public Relations search: Another candidate will be interviewed.

c . Honors Program: The Task Force is meeting as a group, with colleges,
etc. to get something in place by next fall.

5. Reports from Senate Standing Committees.

There were no reports from Standing Committees at this time.

6. Reports from Caucus Leaders.

The Caucus Leader from the College of Arts and Sciences has resigned his
position from the University and a new Caucus Leader for that college will need
to be chosen.

The Caucus Leader from the College of Medicine stated that there were
concerns that there may be a misunderstanding that the Resolution might be
addressing the president rather than the process. The faculty hoped that the
Senate would continue to work with the administration.

The Caucus Leader from the College of Allied Health passed out copies of two
resolutions voted on in their college wherein they (a) requested that the Senate
should reconsider its vote of no confidence in the Board of Trustees; (b)
recommended that appropriate procedures for the presidential succession should
be developed; and (c) requested that the Senate establish policies that will
allow senators to caucus with the faculty prior to voting on substantive issues.

In response to the report from Allied Health, the Caucus Leader from the
College of Business and various Senators from Arts and Science reported that the
Senate’s Resolution expressed the sentiments of their colleges.

There were no further reports from Caucus Leaders.

7. Old Business

Some Senators asked the Chair to clarify the “extraordinary circumstances”
referred to by Mr. Brunson in his letter to Dr. Jones.

8. New Business

The condition of the Athletics Program at the University of South Alabama was
briefly discussed by Doug Haywick, the Senate Representative of the USA Athletic
Council. Athletics has been losing money for some time and like all divisions of
the University, they have been under pressure to correct the deficit.
Significant concern has also been expressed about equality issues. Although USA
has been trying to meet Federal guidelines concerning gender equity like
virtually all other universities in the country, has not done so. At a December
meeting Dale Adams and Joe Gottfried asked for input to these problems and
suggested, as a partial remedy, that the Men’s Soccer Program should be
terminated. In his summary to the Senate, Haywick stressed that the single
greatest reason for ending Men’s Soccer was the gender equity issue and the
risk of losing Federal funding if we violate Federal Regulations. At this point,
Haywick admitted confusion over recent newspaper reports stating that some
advocates (primarily the Alumni Association) are openly discussing bringing NCAA
football to this campus. This seemed in the last meeting of the Athletic Council
to be an unattainable goal. Even if money were to be found to support football
on an ongoing basis, the University would have an even worse problem with gender
equity than they do now. They would either have to terminate other Men’s
programs, or they would have to add several Women’s sports. According to the
information provided at the last Council meeting, even without football, USA
will have to add at least one Women’s program to try to achieve conformity
with Federal equality guidelines. Haywick asked the Senators for feedback on
Athletics in general and football in particular and the general consensus was
that the faculty would not be in favor of football now or at any time in the
future because of the drain on University resources that would inevitably
result. Any threat to funding for academic programs or to the University’s
endowment (as administered through the USA Foundation) would be resisted.

9. Communications from the President

There were no communications from the President other than those conveyed
in the Chair’s Report.